Alignant
Well, C++ never had great tools for unit testing
Anonymous
and a flaw
Ludovic 'Archivist'
because they just do not want to FUCKING WRITE UNIT TESTS
#include <thread>
#include <iostream>
volatile int counter=0;
void incr(const int count=200000)
{
for(int i=0;i<count;i++)
counter++;
}
int main()
{
std::thread m(incr,200000);
incr(200000);
std::cout << "Expects 400000, get "<< counter <<std::endl;
}
Anonymous
and that flaw is shit like this gets pushed to master and when i am working on the server side code i go WHAT THE FUCK? EVERYTHING HERE SHOULD BE FUCKING WORKING
Anonymous
fair enough
Ludovic 'Archivist'
#include <thread>
#include <iostream>
volatile int counter=0;
void incr(const int count=200000)
{
for(int i=0;i<count;i++)
counter++;
}
int main()
{
std::thread m(incr,200000);
incr(200000);
std::cout << "Expects 400000, get "<< counter <<std::endl;
}
[archivist@localhost SmallTests]$ g++ volatile.cpp -pthread
[archivist@localhost SmallTests]$ ./a.out
Expects 400000, get 213170
Anonymous
we are still using semaphores for that side of the project so that is still good
Anonymous
the only time i use volatiles is in embedded systems which actually only have 1 core to begin with
Ludovic 'Archivist'
Remember, volatile is not threadsafe at all
Ludovic 'Archivist'
the only time i use volatiles is in embedded systems which actually only have 1 core to begin with
then unless you also use some sort of threading with unpredictable yielding, it is not useful either
Anonymous
Anonymous
for embedded systems some people say when in doubt use volatile
Anonymous
https://barrgroup.com/Embedded-Systems/How-To/C-Volatile-Keyword
olli
Ludovic 'Archivist'
for embedded systems some people say when in doubt use volatile
Those people have the name Idiots
Anonymous
probably much more then you
Ludovic 'Archivist'
those people also make quite a lot of embedded systems
"Not because the idiots are numerous means that they are right" A. Einstein
Anonymous
however volatile prevents optimizations of certain variables
Alignant
"Not because the idiots are numerous means that they are right" A. Einstein
Pity Einsteint didn't see embedded development :c
Anonymous
Pity Einsteint didn't see embedded development :c
he also was a harm to the theoritical physics community
Anonymous
but whatever
BinaryByter
he also was a harm to the theoritical physics community
by hyppothizing something that satellites have to think about in order not to crash? 🤔
Ludovic 'Archivist'
he also was a harm to the theoritical physics community
Well, maybe he was not, he could not think about Quantum mechanics being probabilistic, and this fact was questionned 3 weeks ago
BinaryByter
Well, maybe he was not, he could not think about Quantum mechanics being probabilistic, and this fact was questionned 3 weeks ago
QM IS PROBABILISTIC YOU DUMBFUCKS
BinaryByter
lol
Anonymous
Well, maybe he was not, he could not think about Quantum mechanics being probabilistic, and this fact was questionned 3 weeks ago
well not only that but he actually also made mistakes in his own papers and all this
BinaryByter
Just the fact that you have Probability amplitudes causing the interference should make that clear
Anonymous
which were later corrected
Anonymous
and we just sweep those corrections under the rug
Anonymous
because we want to make him look good when in reality he had basically no clue about his own theories which he supposedly wrote
Ludovic 'Archivist'
QM IS PROBABILISTIC YOU DUMBFUCKS
Maybe it is not, a team found another explanation
Ludovic 'Archivist'
which is compatible with explaining gravity in quantum environments too
Anonymous
QM literally is just an extension of statistical physics
Anonymous
which is compatible with explaining gravity in quantum environments too
gravity is an area of QM which we likely will never be able to explain
Anonymous
because CERN was a complete failure here
Alignant
QM IS PROBABILISTIC YOU DUMBFUCKS
That is only a useful model, lol.
Nobody know how it really works. Physicists are like embedded devs. They doubt a lot
Anonymous
the main reason for it was to witness higher dimensional gravitational energy
BinaryByter
That is only a useful model, lol.
Nobody know how it really works. Physicists are like embedded devs. They doubt a lot
I know, I know calm down. But the explanation of the q-slit called QM only works BECAUSE of probability
Anonymous
the next size we need to potentially witness it is like half the size of the milky way galaxy
Anonymous
That is only a useful model, lol.
Nobody know how it really works. Physicists are like embedded devs. They doubt a lot
no embedded devs can ACTUALLY FUCKING TEST THEIR CODE IF THEY GET THE FUCK OFF THEIR LAZY ASSES
Zinc
What about QIT thats a theoretical explanation for the exploitation of the laws of quantum physics in communication and computation?
Anonymous
theoritical physicists cannot
Zinc
Oh
Anonymous
but now we have too many fucking crackpot physicists
Anonymous
who care more about gender equality
Anonymous
and less about the math
Anonymous
theoritical physics as existed at the time of Dirac is completely dead now
Zinc
There's no more logical reasoning. Seems like it's been chunked out a window.
Anonymous
because we do not have enough Nazi ex scientists to work on it
Alignant
But... gender equality would... double the number of physicists :D
Anonymous
it does not
Anonymous
universities are refusing to hire male applicants
Anonymous
because they want female ones
Anonymous
instead of spending money and teaching elementary school kids
Anonymous
how to go to become theoritical physicists
Zinc
?
Physicist that do not use logical reasoning and prove fact with mathematics but rather side with illogical opinions.
Anonymous
we do the dumbest thing possible and attack potential theoritical physicists to inspire FEMALES to become theoritical physicists
Alignant
how to go to become theoritical physicists
I need to have some drink, that's depressing :D
Anonymous
Physicist that do not use logical reasoning and prove fact with mathematics but rather side with illogical opinions.
theoritical physicists always are supposed to use actual mathematics to prove it
Anonymous
just go read any paper on any of this stuff
Anonymous
it is all based on the previous work einstein dirac and feynmann did
Anonymous
but they are dead now
Anonymous
and we only have people skilled enough to make small modifications to their theories and apply them
Anonymous
no longer inventing new ways to do this
Zinc
theoritical physicists always are supposed to use actual mathematics to prove it
I agree with what your saying. Mathematics is the best form of explanation for facts.
Alignant
Yeah, that's nice God created it
Zinc
My point was that not everyone can prove factual evidence like a theoretical physicist.
Anonymous
My point was that not everyone can prove factual evidence like a theoretical physicist.
most theoritical physicists now are shit
Anonymous
they also do not have many young people going in
Anonymous
it is actually a possibility it will die out
Anonymous
which will be a shame